Skip to main content

About your Search

20121202
20121210
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)
. however, i think if we fall to the clinton era tax rates, i'm okay with that. i think that e we ought to have some wiggle room on the tax rates because i think the country wants us to compromise. so there's compromise space there, but make no mistake, we're not going to compromise away the upper end tax rates. that's on the table. it will stay on the table. that's what the american people are asking for. >> congressman, great to have you with us tonight on "the ed show." appreciate your time. remember to answer tonight's question. share your thoughts on twitter and on facebook. we always encourage you and want to know what you think. >>> coming up, mitch mcconnell filibusters his own bill in the senate. bernie sanders joins us to talk about what that means for the future. >>> and fiscal cliff talks. stay with us. you're watching "the ed show" on >>> unemployment hits a four had-year low, but republican obstruction is keeping the country from creates more jobs. we'll bring you the latest numbers and i'll ask david cay johnston why now is the time to focus on job creation. >>> and the s
the rich. >> clayton: and questions whether we'd go back to the clinton era, 37 somewhere? at the end of the day the point what mr. forbes was saying, if the president does nothing, yes, the taxes go back up to those previous rates and also, defense gets cuts. forget about, we're not talking see questions station much, b -- sequestration? >> did you see what's happening in california, maybe that should be a barometer. tax increases in the state of california and raise revenue and look at the revenues have not gone up. >> a lot of republicans see california and americans, many democrats see california as a cautionary tale. what california has done and interesting and got then them ooh into a pickle. they have the battle initiatives where voters can go in themselves and vote for what they want and these all cost money. >> it all costs money. >> yeah, this is a mistake of california, right? since the late 70's, when these ballot provisions started going through, yes, you had a number of them. i was out there when was unfoldi unfolding, a number passed and californias voted to increase th
in the past -- the famous showdown with newt gingrich and clinton. when you have divided government, you have clashes of major philosophical difference. the key is being able to have an element of compromise as part of that process. that is exactly the place we are in right now, trying to find that point. >> the best model for all of you who are working so hard on this may well be speilberg's movie about lincoln. lincoln made deals. you know what, he achieved great, great goals. it goes to the point you are making -- politicians are supposed to play politics, that is not a dirty word. >> the legendary "bloomberg view" columnist -- margaret carlson. >> i had this plan for a couple weeks -- i thought, this could happen. when you said you cannot get people in the corner as the president has with the tax increase on the wealthy -- here is the plan. on december 31, the bush tax cuts expire. after you have your champagne and you are funny hats on, on january 1 at 12:01 a.m., there is a middle-class tax cut and the top rate is 39.6%, then they are cut to 37%, so republicans get their tax cut. isn't
the rates on high earners to go back up to what they were under president clinton, and reducing the value of tax deductions and other tax benefits that they get. before i get to how much can be raised by the second, let me just say the president is very, very supportive of curbing tax deductions for high-income households. it's been a part of his plan from his very first budget. in fact, he was and remains the only major leaguer in washington that has put forward a specific, explicit plan that would limit those tax benefits for high- income households that's been examined by the joint committee on taxation, which is the official referee for these issues in congress. that plan, though, doesn't raise the revenue that you need. so out of the president's $1.6 trillion, $950 billion comes from decoupling. decoupling is the high-income rates going away, the middle- class tax cuts becoming permanent. that gets you $950 billion of revenue. the question is could you plausibly replace that revenue just by limiting tax expenditures. there have been lots of different ideas out there. it's always a li
Search Results 0 to 6 of about 7 (some duplicates have been removed)